Do “three strikes” sentencing laws help reduce serious crimesThree strikes laws are a law that was first used in the 1990s 1990 and is an extension of rational choice theory, which allows a person to be sentenced to life in prison after their third strike. Should a minor offense be punished the same as a major offense? California's three strikes law leaves no room for error in the criminal activities of repeat offenders. Once you commit three serious crimes, you are sentenced to twenty-five years to life in prison. How does this affect our society and how does the government respond to this law. Does this law actually keep the public safe by locking up juvenile offenders, or are we just spending billions on the prison system? What does it mean to be for or against, should this apply to everyone in all criminal situations, based on minor crimes and major crimes? Why did lawmakers choose this method of sentencing? According to John R. Schafer, he argues that "strict enforcement of three-step laws is an effective crime-fighting policy and can break the cycle of crime among young offenders" (Schafer, 1999). However, on the other hand, attorney Michael Vitiello states that "the three strikes laws have failed to deliver on their promises to reduce serious crime." Moreover, the costs of such laws appear to exceed their benefits” (Vitiello, 2002). First, the deterrent effect of three-strikes laws is that they keep repeat offenders in prison for a long period of time. After a person's second conviction, if they do not refrain from criminal activity, they will receive their third punishment. This law ensures that repeat offenders stay in prison and protects law-abiding citizens. The law also sends me a severe...... middle of paper ...... ate more and more money that we already don't have and could use for something else. http://www.balancedpolitics.org/trois_strikes.htmFinally, the three strike law is actually a law and regardless of the crime, if a person chooses and continues to commit crimes, they will be incarcerated and for some, this will be a life sentence. . Despite all the controversy behind this law, I still agree with Schafer. Breaking the cycle of crime among our young people would be the best solution. Keeping our young offenders out of prison would reduce the crushing price the State of California and taxpayers pay each year. Ultimately, the most violent and dangerous criminals will continue to commit crimes regardless of the law. I believe that this law continues to protect the normal citizen and still prevents the minor criminal from committing certain crimes..